Rockbros

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Jdsk
Posts: 24635
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Rockbros

Post by Jdsk »

steelframe wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 9:53amYou can read the Spurcycle vs. Rockbros story here: https://cyclingtips.com/2016/08/a-tale- ... erfeiters/
It is even worse than one would assume.
Thanks.

I was wondering why the design wasn't protected, and that gives the answer.

Jonathan
richardfm
Posts: 969
Joined: 15 Apr 2018, 3:17pm
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Re: Rockbros

Post by richardfm »

Jdsk wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 11:48am
steelframe wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 9:53amYou can read the Spurcycle vs. Rockbros story here: https://cyclingtips.com/2016/08/a-tale- ... erfeiters/
It is even worse than one would assume.
Thanks.

I was wondering why the design wasn't protected, and that gives the answer.

Jonathan
Even if they had taken out a patent there would be little they could do to stop a Chinese corporation copying the design.
Richard M
Cardiff
User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 7804
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 24 Hours from Lands End

Re: Rockbros

Post by Paulatic »

richardfm wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 12:24pm
Jdsk wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 11:48am
steelframe wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 9:53amYou can read the Spurcycle vs. Rockbros story here: https://cyclingtips.com/2016/08/a-tale- ... erfeiters/
It is even worse than one would assume.
Thanks.

I was wondering why the design wasn't protected, and that gives the answer.

Jonathan
Even if they had taken out a patent there would be little they could do to stop a Chinese corporation copying the design.
Can you find a Chinese copy of SMP Saddles?
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
steelframe
Posts: 83
Joined: 3 Aug 2015, 10:02pm
Location: Berlin

Re: Rockbros

Post by steelframe »

richardfm wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 12:24pm Even if they had taken out a patent there would be little they could do to stop a Chinese corporation copying the design.
Jup. I think even w/o a patent there would probably be a good chance against the clones. Brompton successfully sued clones from being sold in Europe well after their patent ran out due to the iconic design being considered unique, part of the brand and thus being protected. This went well against Neobike in 2004, Nishiki in 2008 and Cedtech in I think 2020. They failed however against Dahon regarding the Curl.
I think the same "unique shape" argument would be true for Spurcycle. But, being a small company, going to court is always a huge effort and financial risk. Plus it is one thing to sue someone in Europe and another to sue someone in China - the latter is rather fighting a swarm of angry bees. If you succeed against one another one will simply take over. Even Brompton does not seem to fight the in the meantime countless clones of their bikes that are available in Asia.

On the other hand: If we consider the behaviour of Rockbros in terms of cloning the Spurcycle bell at least morally dirty (if not illegal): Would buying such a bell based on a stolen design just because it is cheaper not be more or less the same as buying a stolen bike in a park just because it's cheaper? Would we go over that as easily as over buying a Rockbros bell? Would we go over that as easily if it was us who invented the Spurcycle? And would then buying other stuff from Rockbros not be the same as making business with someone we know is a criminal and this way supporting him? Would we do that in our local area?

It is always easy to point at someone else's responsibility. The easier, if he is far away and we have no personal relationship. It is far more discomforting if we look at our own behavior, responsibility and possibilities. I do not want to support a behavior like what Rockbros did with Spurcycle, no matter if what they did was illegal or not. Thus I simply do not buy anything from them.
User avatar
RickH
Posts: 5832
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Rockbros

Post by RickH »

If you want a nice sounding, quality bell & don't want to pay the Spurcycle price. For not too much more than the Rockbros one,there is Lion Bellworks (https://www.lionbellworks.co.uk). They seem to be having a (slightly longer than planned by the look of it) break at the moment so I don't know current prices. I paid £23 in December 2020 (£20 + shipping). :D
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
leftpoole
Posts: 1492
Joined: 12 Feb 2007, 9:31am
Location: Account closing 31st July '22

Re: Rockbros

Post by leftpoole »

steelframe wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 12:45pm
richardfm wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 12:24pm Even if they had taken out a patent there would be little they could do to stop a Chinese corporation copying the design.
Jup. I think even w/o a patent there would probably be a good chance against the clones. Brompton successfully sued clones from being sold in Europe well after their patent ran out due to the iconic design being considered unique, part of the brand and thus being protected. This went well against Neobike in 2004, Nishiki in 2008 and Cedtech in I think 2020. They failed however against Dahon regarding the Curl.
I think the same "unique shape" argument would be true for Spurcycle. But, being a small company, going to court is always a huge effort and financial risk. Plus it is one thing to sue someone in Europe and another to sue someone in China - the latter is rather fighting a swarm of angry bees. If you succeed against one another one will simply take over. Even Brompton does not seem to fight the in the meantime countless clones of their bikes that are available in Asia.

On the other hand: If we consider the behaviour of Rockbros in terms of cloning the Spurcycle bell at least morally dirty (if not illegal): Would buying such a bell based on a stolen design just because it is cheaper not be more or less the same as buying a stolen bike in a park just because it's cheaper? Would we go over that as easily as over buying a Rockbros bell? Would we go over that as easily if it was us who invented the Spurcycle? And would then buying other stuff from Rockbros not be the same as making business with someone we know is a criminal and this way supporting him? Would we do that in our local area?

It is always easy to point at someone else's responsibility. The easier, if he is far away and we have no personal relationship. It is far more discomforting if we look at our own behavior, responsibility and possibilities. I do not want to support a behavior like what Rockbros did with Spurcycle, no matter if what they did was illegal or not. Thus I simply do not buy anything from them.
All very well and decent of you, BUT we are all living in the real World.
Take a deep breath and do something useful.....
steelframe
Posts: 83
Joined: 3 Aug 2015, 10:02pm
Location: Berlin

Re: Rockbros

Post by steelframe »

leftpoole wrote: 6 Jun 2022, 10:08am All very well and decent of you, BUT we are all living in the real World.
So you think acting responsibly, reflection of own behavior and taking responsibility for the consequences of own actions have and should have no place in the "real world"?
leftpoole wrote: 6 Jun 2022, 10:08am Take a deep breath and do something useful.....
I think I do.

PS: According to your profile I'm not sure your location is in the real world either:
leftpoole
Location: In my own mind.
:wink:
leftpoole
Posts: 1492
Joined: 12 Feb 2007, 9:31am
Location: Account closing 31st July '22

Re: Rockbros

Post by leftpoole »

steelframe wrote: 6 Jun 2022, 11:14am
leftpoole wrote: 6 Jun 2022, 10:08am All very well and decent of you, BUT we are all living in the real World.
So you think acting responsibly, reflection of own behavior and taking responsibility for the consequences of own actions have and should have no place in the "real world"?
leftpoole wrote: 6 Jun 2022, 10:08am Take a deep breath and do something useful.....
I think I do.

PS: According to your profile I'm not sure your location is in the real world either:
leftpoole
Location: In my own mind.
:wink:
I actually agree with the sentiments expressed by yourself.
However living in this the real world is another matter. On your own you can be moral and egotistical at the same time.
Whenever I sell or buy I do my very best to be honest and truthful. I am after all a Christian.
Doing useful things? Yes I think that I do.
Happy days.....
PS:- I was originally expressing an opinion.
mattsccm
Posts: 5101
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: Rockbros

Post by mattsccm »

Back to the point! Rockbros is another cheap Chinese/far eastern brand that by sheer force of advertisng has become nearly mainstream. Gripgrab are another, so are Ekoi. Good marketing and advertising is making them more common. (Eg. Ekoi sponsor a pro race team). Quality was never the best but maybe that doesn't matter.
It is reasonable stuff for the price and may do the job perfectly. Buying from the UK is daft if you can buy the identical thing via Aliexpress.
As most of the cheaper cycling stuff comes from the same part of the world, you can save plenty. I have 2 sets of tubeless valves. One badged by Giant retails at 20 quid. An identical set from China was 2 quid.
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 5430
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Rockbros

Post by Cugel »

Some may think a bell of a particular shape is somehow a unique and wunnerful design that no one other than Mr Spur could possibly have thought of. Some may think that Mr Spur has been somehow impoverished, diminished or even robbed by someone else making & selling a bell vaguely like the bell he sells.

I don't.

This notion that the teeniest of design tweaks to a very well established technology somehow makes a unique piece of property that should only belong to one fellow, despite 99.9% of the design being a conglomeration of a hundred or more of previous design elements stretching back into the mists of history, well .... it's just silly, is it not?

Personally I feel that the whole notion of intellectual property is highly suspect, since it's a rare intellectual construct that doesn't contain only 0.01% innovative new stuff added to the 99.99% already extant design, technology, material science et al.

Of course, business and its lawyers have a different attitude. They have only one rule which seems to be, "MINE". Just greedy rascals, performing the metaphysical equivalent of an Enclosure Act, says I.

Mind, going on about bell-copying is quite a handy vehicle for those who are seeking an excuse to bash foreigners who happen to make similar things to "ours" for a lot less dosh. Comin' over 'ere with their better cheaper bells!

And whilst I'm on, why are you consumers arguing for a monopoly on a bell that costs 5X what its worth?

Cugel, waiting for some spiv to enclose the oxygen and call it his.
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
AndyK
Posts: 1498
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm
Location: Mid Hampshire

Re: Rockbros

Post by AndyK »

steelframe wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 12:45pm Would buying such a bell based on a stolen design just because it is cheaper not be more or less the same as buying a stolen bike in a park just because it's cheaper?
Well... nope. Both may well be wrong but they are not the same. By taking possession of a stolen bike you have deprived the true owner of the use of that item. There was only one thing, and now you've got it and they haven't, and they're walking home. By copying something (a design for a bell, a book, a film, a piece of music or even a design for a whole bicycle) you have not deprived anyone else of its use. The creator still has it, the people who bought copies from the creator still have them. That's very different. Still illegal in most jurisdictions, but different. It's not technically "theft", it's infringement of intellectual property rights.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Rockbros

Post by reohn2 »

Here's the story of bell purchase by me
I wanted a bell,I searched Ebay and found a bell that suited my needs,small that could fit to the steerer spacers and be hidden from sight when riding under the stem.£8 Rock Bros.
I bought one and found the quality to be worth what I paid for it,I bought a few more,six in all for all the bikes Inhad at the time.Total = £48.
Later through informing the forum I found out about Spur cycle bells @£50 a pop,and was accused of supporting plagiarism.

Would have paid £50 for one bell or £300 for six bells?
Not on your Nellie I wouldn't,so I didn't steal anything from Spur Cycle.

But I did unknowingly bbuy six copies of Spurcycle bells ,would I do it again or not have bells yes I would os guilty as charged
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
steelframe
Posts: 83
Joined: 3 Aug 2015, 10:02pm
Location: Berlin

Re: Rockbros

Post by steelframe »

AndyK wrote: 9 Jun 2022, 11:00pm
steelframe wrote: 5 Jun 2022, 12:45pm Would buying such a bell based on a stolen design just because it is cheaper not be more or less the same as buying a stolen bike in a park just because it's cheaper?
Well... nope. Both may well be wrong but they are not the same. By taking possession of a stolen bike you have deprived the true owner of the use of that item. There was only one thing, and now you've got it and they haven't, and they're walking home. By copying something (a design for a bell, a book, a film, a piece of music or even a design for a whole bicycle) you have not deprived anyone else of its use. The creator still has it, the people who bought copies from the creator still have them. That's very different. Still illegal in most jurisdictions, but different. It's not technically "theft", it's infringement of intellectual property rights.
Regarding the company respectively the original owner you are surely correct. It is basically similar when back in the days a lot of people had a cracked/pirated version of Photoshop on their computers. Most of then did only things with it that they could also (and maybe easier) achieve in MS Paint. It was for the status and those people would never ever have bought a legal copy of photoshop for hundreds of dollars. And they "helped" Photoshop becoming the perceived standard for picture editing to a degree that all alternatives were considered immature. But I would say this does not hold true for the Spurcycle and other physical products. They do - as the article linked above proves - suffer from economic damage as well as a reputation damage through Rockbos (who themselves generate a lot of profit).

But I was looking at the buyer's perspective: People buy the Spurcycle copies because they love the look. The look of the Spurcycle, not the genuine look of the Rockbros (as it has no genuine look - it is stolen from spurcycle). They either are not willing or cannot afford the price of the Spurcycle, so they buy the same look cheaper in a pirated version (talking of the concious bayers, not the inconcious ones ). Ant that is in my eyes basically the same as buying a stolen bike on the cheap because one cannot or doesn't want to afford the normal price.
Last edited by steelframe on 10 Jun 2022, 7:09am, edited 1 time in total.
steelframe
Posts: 83
Joined: 3 Aug 2015, 10:02pm
Location: Berlin

Re: Rockbros

Post by steelframe »

reohn2 wrote: 10 Jun 2022, 12:11am But I did unknowingly bbuy six copies of Spurcycle bells ,would I do it again or not have bells yes I would os guilty as charged
It's not as if there were only two types of bells: The Spurcycle and fraudulent copies of the Spurcycle. There are indeed hundreds if not thousands of different bells on the market.
Tangled Metal
Posts: 9505
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Rockbros

Post by Tangled Metal »

Does anyone remember an "innovative" company called Dyson that "invented" the bagless vacuum cleaner? Spurcycle reminds me of that company a little bit.

Take a well established technology, repackage it and perhaps slap a patent pending tag or image of novel design and people such it up in their thousands or millions. Dyson applied for a patent on the core technology but it was established well before he "invented" it and the patent never got issued. Never would, that wasn't his goal he probably knew it would never be novel enough design to get the patent.

Back to spurcycle, did they even apply for a patent? Why not? Could it be that they just repackaged an existing technology albeit made a rather nice product?

People need to put emotions aside and realise that spurcycle is just a rather nice looking metal bicycle bell not something unique technology wise.

Roast cycling tips article had a photo of the two bells and it was clear to me which was cheap and which was expensive but better quality. Perhaps spurcycle should make more of their quality which I think they do. That is their only innovation imho, to make a better, USA made bell. Good on them for that. Good on rockbros for putting a cheaper metal bell out there for those who don't want to spend the money as freely.
Post Reply